de.mpg.escidoc.pubman.appbase.FacesBean
English
 
Help Guide Privacy Policy Disclaimer Contact us
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Released

Conference Paper

Do we need the closed-world assumption in knowledge representation?

MPS-Authors
http://pubman.mpdl.mpg.de/cone/persons/resource/persons44660

Hustadt,  Ullrich
Programming Logics, MPI for Informatics, Max Planck Society;

Locator
There are no locators available
Fulltext (public)
There are no public fulltexts available
Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available
Citation

Hustadt, U. (1994). Do we need the closed-world assumption in knowledge representation? In F. Baader, M. Buchheit, M. A. Jeusfeld, & W. Nutt (Eds.), Working Notes of the KI'94 Workshop: Reasoning about Structured Objects: Knowledge Representation meets Databases (KRDB'94) (pp. 24-26). Saarbrücken, Germany: DFKI.


Cite as: http://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-0014-AD75-4
Abstract
In this paper I want to focus on some principal differences between data models of database systems and knowledge representation languages. The data manipulation languages of data models are based on the closed-world, unique-name, and domain-closure assumption. Data manipulation languages and query languages of knowledge representation formalisms differ considerably in their underlying assumptions. They are based on the open-world, unique-name, and open-domain assumption. That means, that even if the data definition language and the data manipulation language of a database management system and a knowledge base management system would coincide, the results of data manipulations would differ. I present some examples that show the usefulness of closed-world inferences in natural language processing. Thus knowledge representation languages sticking to the open-world assumption seem to be insufficient for natural language processing.